Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2014 Apr 16:7:93-104.
doi: 10.2147/CEG.S56725. eCollection 2014.

A systematic review of transarterial embolization versus emergency surgery in treatment of major nonvariceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding

Andrew D Beggs  1 , Mark P Dilworth  1 , Susan L Powell  2 , Helen Atherton  3 , Ewen A Griffiths  4
Affiliations

A systematic review of transarterial embolization versus emergency surgery in treatment of major nonvariceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding

Andrew D Beggs et al. Clin Exp Gastroenterol. .

Abstract

Background: Emergency surgery or transarterial embolization (TAE) are options for the treatment of recurrent or refractory nonvariceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding. Surgery has the disadvantage of high rates of postoperative morbidity and mortality. Embolization has become more available and has the advantage of avoiding laparotomy in this often unfit and elderly population.

Objective: To carry out a systematic review and meta-analysis of all studies that have directly compared TAE with emergency surgery in the treatment of major upper gastrointestinal bleeding that has failed therapeutic upper gastrointestinal endoscopy.

Methods: A literature search of Ovid MEDLINE, Embase, and Google Scholar was performed. The primary outcomes were all-cause mortality and rates of rebleeding. The secondary outcomes were length of stay and postoperative complications.

Results: A total of nine studies with 711 patients (347 who had embolization and 364 who had surgery) were analyzed. Patients in the TAE group were more likely to have ischemic heart disease (odds ratio [OR] =1.99; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.33, 2.98; P=0.0008; I (2)=67% [random effects model]) and be coagulopathic (pooled OR =2.23; 95% CI: 1.29, 3.87; P=0.004; I (2)=33% [fixed effects model]). Compared with TAE, surgery was associated with a lower risk of rebleeding (OR =0.41; 95% CI: 0.22, 0.77; P<0.0001; I (2)=55% [random effects]). There was no difference in mortality (OR =0.70; 95% CI: 0.48, 1.02; P=0.06; I (2)=44% [fixed effects]) between TAE and surgery.

Conclusion: When compared with surgery, TAE had a significant increased risk of rebleeding rates after TAE; however, there were no differences in mortality rates. These findings are subject to multiple sources of bias due to poor quality studies. These findings support the need for a well-designed clinical trial to ascertain which technique is superior.

Keywords: GI hemmorhage; interventional radiology; meta-analysis; radiology; surgery.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Flowchart showing study selection.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Forest plot of mean age, between the embolization and TAE groups. Abbreviations: CI, confidence interval; df, degrees of freedom; IV, initialization vector; SD, standard deviation; TAE, transarterial embolization.
Figure 3
Figure 3
Pooled mean differences in hemoglobin levels preprocedure, comparing TAE and surgery. Abbreviations: CI, confidence interval; df, degrees of freedom; IV, initialization vector; SD, standard deviation; TAE, transarterial embolization.
Figure 4
Figure 4
Forest plot of rates of mortality, comparing TAE versus surgery. Abbreviations: CI, confidence interval; df, degrees of freedom; M-H, Mantel-Haenszel; TAE, transarterial embolization.
Figure 5
Figure 5
Forest plot of rates of rebleeding after therapy, comparing TAE versus surgery. Abbreviations: CI, confidence interval; df, degrees of freedom; M-H, Mantel-Haenszel; TAE, transarterial embolization.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Ang D, Teo EK, Tan A, et al. A comparison of surgery versus transcatheter angiographic embolization in the treatment of nonvariceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding uncontrolled by endoscopy. Eur J Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2012;24(8):929–938. - PubMed
    1. Defreyne L, De Schrijver I, Decruyenaere J, et al. Therapeutic decision-making in endoscopically unmanageable nonvariceal upper gastrointestinal hemorrhage. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol. 2008;31(5):897–905. - PubMed
    1. Eriksson LG, Ljungdahl M, Sundbom M, Nyman R. Transcatheter arterial embolization versus surgery in the treatment of upper gastrointestinal bleeding after therapeutic endoscopy failure. J Vasc Interv Radiol. 2008;19(10):1413–1418. - PubMed
    1. Jairath V, Kahan BC, Logan RF, et al. National audit of the use of surgery and radiological embolization after failed endoscopic haemostasis for non-variceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding. Br J Surg. 2012;99(12):1672–1680. - PubMed
    1. Langner I, Langner S, Partecke LI, et al. Acute upper gastrointestinal hemorrhage: is a radiological interventional approach an alternative to emergency surgery? Emerg Radiol. 2008;15(6):413–419. - PubMed